|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
SUMMARY: $650K for a fancy French toilet is a pretty penny for pricey potty. That, and all sorts of big and little decisions are made by the city for we, the people, each week –from those toilets to right turns. They’re interesting, but also fun to learn about.
Lots of interesting tidbits this week in our fair city:
No right-turns-on-red – Yes, banning right-turns-on-red at traffic signals on El Camino is a likely outcome when the Palo Alto City Council approves allowing the state to eliminate parking spaces and develop bike lanes on both sides of El Camino Real. Neither the bike lanes nor the ban on right-turns on red has been fully approved yet, but I’ve been told that both will soon be a reality.
The ban is considered a “safety measure,” so that makes me think the council feels comfortable. If drivers can quickly turn right on red, the chances increase that their automobiles could cause a crash, so safety is good.
Not many bicycles ride along El Camino Real currently, because it is a dangerous street. California’s transportation department’s desire to develop green-painted bike lanes along the stretch is an attempt to give cyclists a green path along The King’s Highway to enable them to ride conveniently from town to town. (Mountain View and Los Altos have already agreed.)
I happen to think that bike lanes along such a key, crowded roadway are an unsafe move because of the many ingresses and egresses along El Camino, especially with cars going in and out of gasoline stations, hotels, motels, retail stores, etc. Although there will be “no right on red” signage at major intersections, it could be a steep learning curve for motorists to get used to, especially since right turns are allowed all over the state.
Some council members say the right-turn ban will occur only at major intersections, such as Charleston and Arastradero Roads, Embarcadero Road, Page Mill Road, Oregon Expressway, etc. But logically, cars turning right from smaller streets could also clash with a cyclist. And some streets, especially Embarcadero Road, have long lines of cars during commute hours waiting a couple of minutes to get across El Camino. Forbidding right-turns-on- red will only increase the length of time and lines as a result of the bike lanes. Too bad.
• • • •
Zoom bombing – Many residents now use Zoom to watch council meetings. Unfortunately, a few of them have misused Zoom to make nasty remarks when called on during the Public Comments section of the meeting. I am referring to those individuals who start speaking and then go into rant of homophobic, Black and antisemitic slurs. Such remarks are annoying, totally inappropriate, distasteful and hurtful –but allowed under legal interpretations of First Amendment rights.
As a result, the Palo Alto Council decided to ban such remarks. How? From now on, all public comments from Zoom are no longer allowed, except for those individuals who want to address agenda items. The public can continue to comment on items that are not on the agenda, but they have to do it in person — not on Zoom. For items that are on the agenda, Zoom and in-person are both an option.
Yet those public comments are a great way for residents to speak directly to council members about issues they are concerned about, and many times their comments are very helpful and useful — pointing out problems the council might not know about. Now a resident has to go to City Hall, oftentimes wait until the council’s closed session ends, and then address the entire council within a three-minute (or less) time allotment. The public comment period is limited to 30 minutes.
Perhaps city officials can find a way to filter those slurs by having a delay between the time a person speaks on the phone and when that conversation is then aired. TV and radio stations oftentimes do this bleeping out of nasty remarks by having a sound engineer preview them seconds before they are on air. That monitoring would allow the public to continue to Zoom from home.
• • • •
Pay to pee – Palo Alto has decided to spend $685,665 for a five-year rental contract with a San Francisco firm to acquire a self-cleaning public toilet (French style). That fee comes to about $400 a day. The city once had two self-cleaning facilities – one at Hamilton and Waverley in the downtown, and one at the nearby PA train station. The downtown one has been eliminated because it was used only about 52 times a day, while the one at the station has an average use of 182 people a day. The cost per use: 50 cents.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the toilet was free? We’re in a credit card age, and many of us no longer carry change. Right now, if the need arises, a person will have to find 50 cents somehow. Poor person.
Isn’t there a better solution? Can’t toilet facilities be added inside the train station or adjacent to it? If toilets were permanently installed, at the station, it would be a useful amenity for years to come.
In fact, the city is putting up new toilets in four Palo Alto parks that will cost about $600,000 per site, which includes the structure and the plumbing but not janitorial care. Incorporating bathrooms at the train station may be more costly, but it would be a long-term solution.
The rental decision was made for the self-cleaning toilet, which I’m sure will impress all visitors. Nevertheless, $650K for a fancy French toilet is a pretty penny for pricey potty.
“… logically, cars turning right from smaller streets” would be moving more slowly, making any impact less harmful
The train station of course has bathrooms, but currently I think only transportation personnel have access. As I recall, when a cafe first moved into the downtown train station building after CalTrain closed it, the City subsidized their rent on the grounds that they would keep the restrooms open to the public. The cafe eventually restricted access to cafe customers (not sure if the City was still subsidizing their rent then), and then closed a few years ago.
A free “self-cleaning” toilet was installed years ago at the downtown train station, but whenever I’ve been there, it’s usually disgustingly messy, malfunctioning, or both. I was shocked years ago to use the same type of bathroom in San Francisco near a BART station, and find it not only clean, but decorated with flowers and watched over by an attendant. But Palo Alto can’t provide a clean bathroom at their downtown train station?
In your comments you appear to describe having to appear in person for public comment time as a hardship. Yet until the last few years this was the normal practice. In this age of emails and presumably literacy, residents can easily write to council members when they wish to address an issue not on that night’s agenda, as has always been done..
More recently some residents and non-residents have taken to abusing zoom all too often it appears to give themselves a public forum for their own ego boosting self-aggrandizement. Pushing council meetings ever later into the evenings, including paid staff time. As well as those members of the public waiting to speak to legitimate agenda items pertaining to the actual business of the city.
Do council members and staff have such short memories that they don’t remember why the restrooms at Peers Park had to be closed because of vandalism?
Pay toilets seem to be less of a draw for bad activities inside. As you note, having an attendant might be another good choice.